Cambridge academics have voted to approve controversial rules that will give the university full rights to all patentable innovations developed through it, regardless of where funding has originated (Computing, 1 December).

Opponents of the intellectual property (IP) rights policy say it will hamper IT innovation, severely reducing the university’s access to the best technology inventions and deterring technologists and venture capitalists from becoming involved with research projects.

‘These rules will mean that more researchers will avoid putting their best patentable ideas through the university, and that the university will have more of an ivory tower relationship with local industry,’ said Professor Ross Anderson, computer security group head of Cambridge University computer laboratory.

Jack Lang, entrepreneur in residence at the Judge Business School at Cambridge, says the new rules will ultimately delay the process of getting products to market.

‘This change will add an extra layer of complication, delay and bureaucracy,’ he said. ‘It won’t affect the biochemists, whose developments take a long time to be approved for the market, but it will affect others, such as technologists, where regulation is not as important as speed to market.’

The university says that allowing its Technology Transfer Office to manage all IP rights negotiations, as well as those from publicly funded sources, will protect Cambridge’s awareness and ownership of work produced using its resources and safeguard inventors’ interests.

Cambridge pro-vice chancellor Ian Lesley says the changes are necessary.

‘Speed to market is important, but what venture capitalists want is clarity, and this is what this is giving them, so investments won’t be delayed,’ he said.

Walter Herriott, managing director of Cambridge’s St John’s Innovation Centre, says the move reflects other universities’ approach. ‘The proposed rule change is no different from those in Oxford or Imperial College,’ he said. ‘ Oxford is about five years ahead of Cambridge in IP rights.’

Cambridge academic Professor Sir Richard Friend said: ‘This is about protecting academic freedoms, contrary to misrepresenting the issue as the university grabbing control of IP. This puts IP firmly in the hands of the individual.’